The most talked about topic amongst
the Muslims is undoubtedly the issue of unity. The manifestation of disunity
and proliferation of problems is there for all to see. Difference of opinion
is seen by some to be the main cause for this. It is reckoned that until
and unless Muslims can not agree on simple matters like prayers, as well
as other 'simple' matters, unity can never be achieved. "If there is a
right and a wrong how can two differing answers both be correct?", is a
common question posed when the issue of disunity is discussed. Thus some
see the difference of opinion amongst the Muslims as a major source of
weakness and an obstacle on the path to unity.

To clear the confusion surrounding
difference of opinion and the issue of Muslim unity, a number of questions
need to be answered.

Is it Wrong for Muslims to Differ?

In short, No. Evidence for this is
an incident in which the Prophet (SAW) witnessed the companions disputing,
but did not rebuke them for doing so. The incident relates to the dispute
regarding the 'Asr prayer on their way to Bani Qurayzah. The Prophet instructed
the companions to go and fight the Jews. He said, "Do not pray until you
get to Bani Qurayzah". On route to Bani Qurayzah the time for 'Asr was
drawing to a close. A dispute ensued. One group understood the prophet's
command metaphorically, thinking that the Prophet (SAW) meant hurry up.
A party of the believers prayed there whilst the others prayed after 'Asr
time when they arrived at Bani Qurayzah.

When they next met the Prophet (SAW)
they asked him who was right and who was wrong. It is important to note
the response. Only one of them could have been right, but the Prophet (SAW)
did not point out who that was, rather he said, "Whoever performs ijtihad
and errs will receive one reward. Whoever performs ijtihad and arrives
at the correct answer gets double the reward."

Had it been haraam to differ, the
Prophet (SAW) would have rebuked those differing from the correct opinion
and praised those who were right. This example teaches us to tolerate opposing
Islamic opinions which are arrived at by those qualified to do so after
performing ijtihad.

The scholars in the past recognised
this; "The most learned amongst the people is also one who is most knowledgeable
of the difference amongst the people" (Ghazali, Shawkani, Abu Zahrah)

Before performing Ijtihad it is a
prerequisite for a scholar to be aware of all the differences on the issue
at hand.

3. What Causes Differences?

They can occur due to a number of
factors which include,

a) Hadith Criteria. Different Muhaddith
adopt different criteria of classifying hadith. For example Imam Shafi
didn't take narration from people who use to eat while walking as he did
not consider this as the characteristic of a just person.

b) Adoption of usool. Scholars differed
on the usools they adopted. Imam Malik regard the consensus of the people
of Madinah as indication of the Prophet's sunnah, other scholars like Abu
Hanifah and Ahmed bin Hanbal did not.

c) Interpretation (literal/metaphorical).
Like in the example of the Asr prayer, a difference can occur depending
on the meaning taken from a word. The word 'Touch' in the Qur^Òan
gave rise to a difference on the issue of cleanliness when touching a woman.
Abu Hanifah said touch meant intercourse, where as Imam Shafi said the
touch was the literal touch and not the metaphorical one, thus if a person
touched the hand of a woman. he would lose his wudu.

d) Arabic Language. A word can give
rise to a number of meanings. The word Quru, can be understood as the period
of impurity or the period in between as the word carries both meanings.

Where Does it Occur

This does not mean that difference
can occur in all matters. There are two types of differences. Those that
may arise and those that are invalid

Difference can only occur where ijtihad
is necessary, i.e. where either the text is not definite or the meaning
is not definite. If both are definite, ijtihad is not permitted. A difference
in this case would not be valid and would be rejected.

Thus, there is no difference of opinion
about not drinking alcohol, not eating pork, ruling only by the Shari^Òah
or having only one leader for the Muslim ummah.

In areas where valid differences
may occur, it be can further be divided into two:

a) Where differences may arise and
are permitted to exist, i.e. differences regarding personal worships.

b) Where differences may arise and
are not permitted to exist, i.e. societal matters like buying and selling.

In the former case, companions differed
on various matters, but the companions as a whole, did not condemn the
issue of having differing opinions.

In the latter case for example Abu
Bakr and Umar (RA) differed on issues relating to divorce and the distribution
of money amongst the Muslims (i.e. societal matters). Regarding the divorce.
Abu Bakr held that if talaq was said three times in one sitting it was
only considered as one divorce. He maintained that it must be said on three
separate occasions for it to be considered as three talaqs. Umar (RA) on
the other hand said, saying it three times in one sitting was considered
as three talaqs.

Such a difference cannot be allowed
to exist, otherwise if a husband and wife adopted different opinions, a
situation could occur in which one would consider themselves married whilst
the other would regard themselves as divorced. Only one opinion must exist
for the qadi to judge with, otherwise many disputes would go unresolved.

How Does Islam Deal with Differences?

If differences occur on definite
matters, the Khalifah can use his authority to put a stop to this. An example
of this is when a false prophet emerged claiming that Muhammed (SAW) was
not the final prophet, Abu Bakr sent an army to remove this division. This
is the Islamic way to solve these kinds of disputes.

In those areas where differences
may arise due to ijtihad but will lead to disharmony, it is the right of
the Khalifah to adopt an opinion which he believes to be correct and for
the believers to obey. Two Shari^Òah principles exist which state
this :

- IMAM'S DECREE SETTLES DISPUTES

- IMAM'S DECREE IS OBEYED OPENLY
AND PRIVATELY

This is the mechanism for resolving
such disputes in Islam. This is the way disputes were resolved between
Umar and Abu Bakr. When Khalifah Abu Bakr adopted his opinion, Umar followed.
When Umar became the Khalifah, he adopted his opinion and the believers
then obeyed him.

Differences have existed during the
time of the Prophet (issue of Bani Qurayzah), during the time of the companions,
during the period of the great scholars (like Imam Abu Hanifah, Imam Malik,
Imam Shafi and Imam Hanbal) up until today. It is not a new phenomena.
These differences however, did not stop the Muslims from being the leading
nation in the world. Neither was it or should it be a cause for division.

The differences and division of the
ummah today exist not because of difference of opinion but the lack of
the mechanism which resolves disputes, namely the Khalifah, the only one
who has been given the right to enforce an opinion and resolve disputes.
No leader, no imam, no personality other than the Khalifah has been given
the authority to resolve disputes by adopting an opinion for the people
to follow.

When the Prophet (SAW) passed away
and the companions were busy appointing the first Khalifah, a suggestion
was made to have two leaders, one from the Ansar and one from the Muhajireen.
Abu Bakr (RA) replied by saying that this will cause divisions and infighting,
as well as people making bidah and would cease to refer to the Prophet's
example in conducting there affairs. Abu Bakr (RA) had the insight to realise
that without the one leader, problems would arise. So the many 'problems'
that exist today are merely the symptoms of the MAIN problem, that being
the absence of the leader of the Muslim ummah.

Conclusion

Difference in opinion in itself is
not a bad thing. It ensures that the ummah will never agree on an error.
It also encourages the Muslims to exert themselves to seek knowledge and
become qualified scholars, so they can recognise weak opinions and errors
in ijtihad. Forbidding ijtihad in the past has led to the intellectual
stagnation of this ummah as well as being unable to produce Islamic judgments
on various modern day problems effecting the ummah.

We should thus reject differences
relating to opinions not arising from Ijtihad or those which are relating
to definite matters, tolerate Islamic differences emanating from Ijtihad
relating to individual matters and work to establish the Khilafah to resolve
those disputes which exist only the Khalifah can resolve. Only by reestablishing
the Khilafah and by appointing a Khalifah can the ummah be unified, since
it is only he, who has the authority and the power to do so.